The Green Wolf

My ask box is open. I answer most questions privately, unless it's something that other people may be wondering about AND it's not something personal about the person asking. Feel free to ask me stuff about nature, working with animal parts in art and spirituality, paganism, ethical omnivory, sustainability and environmentalism, and so forth.

Be aware that this Tumblr frequently includes pictures of art made with animal remains, as well as occasional liberal political ideologies. Mostly it's nature photography and art (and not just of charismatic megafauna).

Artist, author, naturalist pagan, and wannabe polymath living in the Pacific Northwe(s)t.


I discovered neopaganism in the mid-1990s, and shortly thereafter began my work with animal totems and neoshamanism. Over the years I've wandered through various paths, ranging from Wicca-flavored neopaganism to Chaos magic, and for several few years I created (and followed) Therioshamanism, a post-industrial neo-shamanic path. These days I've relaxed into a more integrated ecopaganism, less about rituals and journeying, and more about the sacred in every moment.

I've also been creating various neopagan ritual tools and other sacred art from hides, bones, beads and other such things since about the same time. And I've written several nonfiction books on totemism, animal magic, and related topics. My newest book is "Plant and Fungus Totems: Connect With Spirits of Field, Forest and Garden"..

A few places to find me, as I'm all over the internet:


http://www.thegreenwolf.com
http://thegreenwolf.etsy.com
https://www.facebook.com/TheGreenWolfLupa
www.patheos.com/blogs/pathsthroughtheforests/
http://www.patreon.com/user?u=224084
Heh. Got this via FB.
"Nice boots, wanna—"
"EYES OF GANON ARE EVERYWHERE."

Heh. Got this via FB.

"Nice boots, wanna—"

"EYES OF GANON ARE EVERYWHERE."

Surprise, PETA! Sex doesn’t sell

Two new University of Queensland studies on “Using Sexualized Images of Women” have found that when subjects view sexy PETA ads, “Intentions to support the ethical organization were reduced for those exposed to the sexualized advertising” and “that behaviors helpful to the ethical cause diminished after viewing the sexualized advertisements.” In one of the studies, researchers found that men who viewed the ads were likely to report arousal (shocker), but that they were no likelier to support the cause itself. Renata Bongiorno, the lead researcher on both studies, says, ”There’s a negative link between dehumanization and the treatment of others, it reduces concern … If you are using images that are dehumanizing, it’s likely to backfire.” 

(Hat tip to Wolf Force’s FB for the link!)

sammybitchfacewinchester:

I’m so lucky.

Oh, wow. What utter sexist crap. Being a lying rumormonger and a false friend is not the sole province of girls and women. Being a loyal secret-keeper isn’t just something men do. The things in the above list are NOT inherently gendered.
In fact, this whole list suggests the writer (assuming she’s female) has a huge load of internalized misogyny to deal with. From the article I just linked to: “If we, as a society, would stop conditioning girls and women to feel like we have to constantly compete with each other, girl-hate would pretty much stop. If we, as a society, would stop trying to tell girls and women that the most important thing is male attention, we’d stop feeling threatened by other girls and how they look and we’d stop ripping our fellow ladies to shreds over their appearances.”
Oh, and let’s take a quick peek at the heterocentrism of this post, too. “The guy might even fall in love with you”. Great. So what if the girl is gay? Or isn’t into this particular guy? Or what if he’s a Nice Guy (TM) who is just friends with her to try to get in her pants?
Yes, I realize that this list probably resonates for a lot of younger women who are stuck in school and social settings where it’s common for girls/women to be stuck in that “girl hate”morass of competition and backbiting. But that’s not due to some intrinsic nature of the female sex. It’s due to conditioning, and the insecurity that frequently appears in youth and in the toxic fishbowl that is your average junior or senior high school. 
As an adult in my mid-thirties, I have lots of friends of all sexes. It doesn’t matter what sex they are—they’re good people, and we connect on a variety of levels. And it’s been that way every since I escaped high school and had a more relaxed and personally controlled social life that wasn’t stuck in the confines of high school cliques. If you have friends who adhere to the opposite of the above list, chances are you all need to get the hell out of whatever situation you’re in that’s causing so much social stress, and maybe even have some time to mature a little more.

sammybitchfacewinchester:

I’m so lucky.

Oh, wow. What utter sexist crap. Being a lying rumormonger and a false friend is not the sole province of girls and women. Being a loyal secret-keeper isn’t just something men do. The things in the above list are NOT inherently gendered.

In fact, this whole list suggests the writer (assuming she’s female) has a huge load of internalized misogyny to deal with. From the article I just linked to: “If we, as a society, would stop conditioning girls and women to feel like we have to constantly compete with each other, girl-hate would pretty much stop. If we, as a society, would stop trying to tell girls and women that the most important thing is male attention, we’d stop feeling threatened by other girls and how they look and we’d stop ripping our fellow ladies to shreds over their appearances.”

Oh, and let’s take a quick peek at the heterocentrism of this post, too. “The guy might even fall in love with you”. Great. So what if the girl is gay? Or isn’t into this particular guy? Or what if he’s a Nice Guy (TM) who is just friends with her to try to get in her pants?

Yes, I realize that this list probably resonates for a lot of younger women who are stuck in school and social settings where it’s common for girls/women to be stuck in that “girl hate”morass of competition and backbiting. But that’s not due to some intrinsic nature of the female sex. It’s due to conditioning, and the insecurity that frequently appears in youth and in the toxic fishbowl that is your average junior or senior high school.

As an adult in my mid-thirties, I have lots of friends of all sexes. It doesn’t matter what sex they are—they’re good people, and we connect on a variety of levels. And it’s been that way every since I escaped high school and had a more relaxed and personally controlled social life that wasn’t stuck in the confines of high school cliques. If you have friends who adhere to the opposite of the above list, chances are you all need to get the hell out of whatever situation you’re in that’s causing so much social stress, and maybe even have some time to mature a little more.

(via tsukionlyyouonlyyou)

(Image source.)
Like I said on FB, what I like about this comic is that I can clearly see the differences in reactions. There are people who can show their appreciation politely because it’s good cosplay. And then there are the people who reduce the woman to tits and ass. If the first—and especially only—thing you notice about cosplay is tits and ass, you aren’t appreciating it for the right reasons. Take more time to look over the quality of the entire ensemble, its construction, how accurate (or creative!) it is, and how well the person is carrying the character’s persona. If you still insist “BUT I’M A MAN THERE ARE BOOBS I CAN’T HEEEELLLLP IIIIITTTT!!!!” you aren’t trying hard enough to do like any generally healthy adult human being can do and control yourself and your attention, and your best bet is to say nothing and stay the hell away from cosplayers until you can act like said grown-ass adult.

(Image source.)

Like I said on FB, what I like about this comic is that I can clearly see the differences in reactions. There are people who can show their appreciation politely because it’s good cosplay. And then there are the people who reduce the woman to tits and ass. If the first—and especially only—thing you notice about cosplay is tits and ass, you aren’t appreciating it for the right reasons. Take more time to look over the quality of the entire ensemble, its construction, how accurate (or creative!) it is, and how well the person is carrying the character’s persona. If you still insist “BUT I’M A MAN THERE ARE BOOBS I CAN’T HEEEELLLLP IIIIITTTT!!!!” you aren’t trying hard enough to do like any generally healthy adult human being can do and control yourself and your attention, and your best bet is to say nothing and stay the hell away from cosplayers until you can act like said grown-ass adult.

Online bullying – a new and ugly sport for liberal commenters (by Ariel Meadow Stallings)

a-colon-heartcode:

thegreenwolf:

a-colon-heartcode:

thegreenwolf:

I’m the Seattle-based publisher of a network of lifestyle websites read by roughly one million people each month. Almost all of our readers are women, most of them are educated and many of them are quite politically liberal. Because of this large, diverse and progressive readership, we deal with community issues that perhaps wouldn’t be such a problem on smaller sites. And lately, I’ve started to notice a disturbing trend.

Over the past couple of years, I’ve watched the rise of a new form of online performance art, where liberal internet commenters make public sport of flagging potentially problematic language as insensitive, and gleefully calling out authors as needing to “check their privilege” (admit their privileged position within society and its associated benefits).

As a publisher serving readers who identify as both progressive and marginalised (in many different, varying ways), this issue is hugely important to me – I’m protective of the quality of debate on my sites. As a progressive myself, it’s also complex and challenging because while I very much share the political values of the folks who engage in this kind of thing, I’m not on board with the tactics – which essentially amount to liberal bullying, and are way worse than anything I see from the conservatives who swing by my publications. The sad truth is that when it comes to the motivations behind this kind of commenting, it’s basically the same as the GOD HATES FAGS guys – even though the values are the polar opposite.

….

….

I love learning new things about how cultures are defining themselves. I love that people take the time to try to improve my publications by sharing the latest language that communities are using. I love that readers feel safe enough to voice their concerns. I love this shared concern for sensitivity around language. I love the social justice motivations, and the encouragement that we all be self-aware of how the language we use has powerful, sometime unexpected impacts on the people around us.

BUT. But. Seriously, I’m just not down with:

• The derailing of conversations to debate semantics.

• The need to process it all publicly (“Look at me look at me look at meeee! I am the very MOST aware of my privilege and am therefore the very BEST progressive on the entire internet!”).

• The righteousness.

• The intolerance and inability to respect that those who share your values might not share your opinions on this particular subject.

This is where this kind of conversation begins to feel more like liberal bullying, where the only correct response is agreeing and acquiescing. Any other response is seen as ignorant at best, hateful at worst.

Read the rest of the article here.

[Lupa’s note - These are just a few quotes from what is a really good article on the type of overreactive, self-righteous, hardline black and white social justice warrior activity that’s become so prominent on Tumblr and elsewhere. Chances are the people it’s criticizing will just keep justifying themselves anyway, but reblog this anyway for the sake of those who feel like they’re the only ones who hate this sort of bullying.]

Ok, here’s the deal.  It’s true that stopping mind-discussion to criticize someone’s word choice doesn’t actually forward the original conversation.  

BUT.  Semantics are important.  Recognizing privilege is important.  And those little offhand comments, and the poor word choices, and the *ist assumptions made by the person you’re talking to, EVEN IF YOU AGREE WITH THEM ON LOTS OF OTHER THINGS, remain SUPER SHITTY.  The bottom is gonna fall out of any conversation I have with a male feminist the second he uses the word “bitch” in a derogatory manner, or makes some offhand comment about how sexism in video games is mainly the fault of the Japanese, or takes That Fucking Tone with me.  (These things have all actually happened.)  It’s a slap in the fucking face, and it’s hurtful and offensive, and it’s just one more thing that people with privilege do every day and don’t even think about, that slowly wears down the people that their privilege oppresses.  

These little slurs, these tiny jabs, these unintended injuries, need to be discussed.  People don’t even realize what they’re saying.  That guy who made the comment about the Japanese to me, when I brought it up later, defended himself by saying, “Well, but that wasn’t even the main point.”  The fact is that it doesn’t fucking matter.  These things people do amongst themselves — ESPECIALLY people who call themselves allies, ESPECIALLY what they do to the people they claim to be allied with against oppression — are shitty and hurtful.  They are exhausting, and miserable, and it is NOT FUN to be on the receiving end of these comments all the time, and then to call someone out on it, and then to be told, “Stop derailing this conversation, that wasn’t even what we were talking about, can’t you see that this just isn’t as important as what we were doing before.”  

People have a right to be pissed off when their so-called allies oppress them.  And those allies, if they truly want to be allies, should be willing to learn from their mistakes and make a note of these callouts, and NOT GET INTO HUGE FIGHTS ABOUT THEM WITH THE PEOPLE WHO THEY’VE JUST DISCRIMINATED AGAINST, which, tbh, I think is a helluva lot more of a derail than calling someone out on their shitty attitude during a discussion.  Especially since those discussions so often center around the very *ism that one party in the conversation just bore out in whatever shitty thing they said to the person they were talking to.

Plus — and we seem to have skirted around this issue so far — at what point do we start giving a shit about oppressive people?  ”Waah, you called me *ist, you hurt my feeeeeelings.”  Because the fact is, that person whose feelings some pissed-off “liberal bully” just hurt?  That person probably just called the “bully” a subhuman.  I mean, I’m just saying.

I do agree that we need to talk about these things, especially when there is someone being vicious to another person out of racist, sexist, etc. behavior and thought patterns. 

I don’t think this article is about that, though. I’m thinking more in terms of situations with, as the author writes, “The intolerance and inability to respect that those who share your values might not share your opinions on this particular subject”. A good example is the people who jump down my throat for using the word “totem”. I recognize it’s a volatile term and I understand the cultural baggage behind it. I also have my reasons for using it that I have thought long and hard about. I don’t need people to necessarily agree with me; I just want them to not act as though I’m utterly ignorant of the issues. And, again, “The intolerance and inability to respect that those who share your values might not share your opinions on this particular subject”. This is a particular subject with which I disagree with people whom I otherwise agree with on social justice topics in general, to include racism and cultural appropriation.

So the author isn’t talking about SJ warriors going after people who are being very blatantly and insultingly racist, using deliberate slurs to harm. She’s talking about SJ warriors who are so very, very convinced that their perspective is the most right that they won’t allow any other possibility into the field, even from people who have considered their opinions just as much or even more than the Sj warriors have.

I’m not talking about people who are being blatantly, deliberately, and insultingly racist either, though.  I’m talking about about people — especially allies — being ignorant and committing microaggressions.  

And, well…  Here’s the thing.  I also think that your example doesn’t make any sense.  ”Totem” is a “volatile term” because totems are sacred in at least one Native American religion, and you (not being Native American, correct? and also not being a member of said religion, unless I miss my guess) using that term constitutes a microaggression against members of that religion, because you’re appropriating terminology and concepts from a closed religion AND from a culture that has been and continues to be viciously exploited and oppressed by white people.  So really, this is exactly what I was talking about.

The important thing here isn’t your right to have an opinion.  We can all have opinions, and we can all have shitty, oppressive opinions, but people with shitty, oppressive opinions don’t get to call themselves anti-*ist allies.  The real question is, how important is it to you to not oppress others?  You know that using the term “totem” is appropriative — you’ve been told time and time again, by multiple people.  Even if you’re not taking any actual concepts beyond the word itself from the NA religion it comes from, given that you get so much shit for it and piss so many people off, why won’t you just pick a different word?  

That’s really the heart of the matter here.

Because I disagree that the term is a “microaggression”. Like so many loanwords to English, its definition HAS been changed and altered, and my choice is to use that altered definition as an opportunity to educate people about the history behind the term and how it came into general English terminology.

And this brings me back to the article which we were originally discussing, which is the tendency of SJ warriors to ONLY accept their own opinion (such as the idea that a single word is a “microaggression”) and not even consider that someone can have a differing opinion that may not be the horrible offense they think it is.

ETA: To clarify, I do not feel just using the term “totem” is a microaggression. Using it AND misrepresenting yourself as being something you’re not, such as claiming to be Native when you are not? That I see as an offense. But using a single word that has already gained a new definition, and being very clear about how that definition differs from its original? I do not feel that is an offense, and that is where I specifically differ in opinion.

The other thing is that I get frustrated when someone will discount every single element of my writing and my practice, to include my attempts to engage the pagan/etc. community in discussion of cultural issues, solely on the basis of my use of a single term. It feels rather like overkill, like saying an entire research paper is wrong because a word was misspelled.

Online bullying – a new and ugly sport for liberal commenters (by Ariel Meadow Stallings)

a-colon-heartcode:

thegreenwolf:

I’m the Seattle-based publisher of a network of lifestyle websites read by roughly one million people each month. Almost all of our readers are women, most of them are educated and many of them are quite politically liberal. Because of this large, diverse and progressive readership, we deal with community issues that perhaps wouldn’t be such a problem on smaller sites. And lately, I’ve started to notice a disturbing trend.

Over the past couple of years, I’ve watched the rise of a new form of online performance art, where liberal internet commenters make public sport of flagging potentially problematic language as insensitive, and gleefully calling out authors as needing to “check their privilege” (admit their privileged position within society and its associated benefits).

As a publisher serving readers who identify as both progressive and marginalised (in many different, varying ways), this issue is hugely important to me – I’m protective of the quality of debate on my sites. As a progressive myself, it’s also complex and challenging because while I very much share the political values of the folks who engage in this kind of thing, I’m not on board with the tactics – which essentially amount to liberal bullying, and are way worse than anything I see from the conservatives who swing by my publications. The sad truth is that when it comes to the motivations behind this kind of commenting, it’s basically the same as the GOD HATES FAGS guys – even though the values are the polar opposite.

….

….

I love learning new things about how cultures are defining themselves. I love that people take the time to try to improve my publications by sharing the latest language that communities are using. I love that readers feel safe enough to voice their concerns. I love this shared concern for sensitivity around language. I love the social justice motivations, and the encouragement that we all be self-aware of how the language we use has powerful, sometime unexpected impacts on the people around us.

BUT. But. Seriously, I’m just not down with:

• The derailing of conversations to debate semantics.

• The need to process it all publicly (“Look at me look at me look at meeee! I am the very MOST aware of my privilege and am therefore the very BEST progressive on the entire internet!”).

• The righteousness.

• The intolerance and inability to respect that those who share your values might not share your opinions on this particular subject.

This is where this kind of conversation begins to feel more like liberal bullying, where the only correct response is agreeing and acquiescing. Any other response is seen as ignorant at best, hateful at worst.

Read the rest of the article here.

[Lupa’s note - These are just a few quotes from what is a really good article on the type of overreactive, self-righteous, hardline black and white social justice warrior activity that’s become so prominent on Tumblr and elsewhere. Chances are the people it’s criticizing will just keep justifying themselves anyway, but reblog this anyway for the sake of those who feel like they’re the only ones who hate this sort of bullying.]

Ok, here’s the deal.  It’s true that stopping mind-discussion to criticize someone’s word choice doesn’t actually forward the original conversation.  

BUT.  Semantics are important.  Recognizing privilege is important.  And those little offhand comments, and the poor word choices, and the *ist assumptions made by the person you’re talking to, EVEN IF YOU AGREE WITH THEM ON LOTS OF OTHER THINGS, remain SUPER SHITTY.  The bottom is gonna fall out of any conversation I have with a male feminist the second he uses the word “bitch” in a derogatory manner, or makes some offhand comment about how sexism in video games is mainly the fault of the Japanese, or takes That Fucking Tone with me.  (These things have all actually happened.)  It’s a slap in the fucking face, and it’s hurtful and offensive, and it’s just one more thing that people with privilege do every day and don’t even think about, that slowly wears down the people that their privilege oppresses.  

These little slurs, these tiny jabs, these unintended injuries, need to be discussed.  People don’t even realize what they’re saying.  That guy who made the comment about the Japanese to me, when I brought it up later, defended himself by saying, “Well, but that wasn’t even the main point.”  The fact is that it doesn’t fucking matter.  These things people do amongst themselves — ESPECIALLY people who call themselves allies, ESPECIALLY what they do to the people they claim to be allied with against oppression — are shitty and hurtful.  They are exhausting, and miserable, and it is NOT FUN to be on the receiving end of these comments all the time, and then to call someone out on it, and then to be told, “Stop derailing this conversation, that wasn’t even what we were talking about, can’t you see that this just isn’t as important as what we were doing before.”  

People have a right to be pissed off when their so-called allies oppress them.  And those allies, if they truly want to be allies, should be willing to learn from their mistakes and make a note of these callouts, and NOT GET INTO HUGE FIGHTS ABOUT THEM WITH THE PEOPLE WHO THEY’VE JUST DISCRIMINATED AGAINST, which, tbh, I think is a helluva lot more of a derail than calling someone out on their shitty attitude during a discussion.  Especially since those discussions so often center around the very *ism that one party in the conversation just bore out in whatever shitty thing they said to the person they were talking to.

Plus — and we seem to have skirted around this issue so far — at what point do we start giving a shit about oppressive people?  ”Waah, you called me *ist, you hurt my feeeeeelings.”  Because the fact is, that person whose feelings some pissed-off “liberal bully” just hurt?  That person probably just called the “bully” a subhuman.  I mean, I’m just saying.

I do agree that we need to talk about these things, especially when there is someone being vicious to another person out of racist, sexist, etc. behavior and thought patterns. 

I don’t think this article is about that, though. I’m thinking more in terms of situations with, as the author writes, “The intolerance and inability to respect that those who share your values might not share your opinions on this particular subject”. A good example is the people who jump down my throat for using the word “totem”. I recognize it’s a volatile term and I understand the cultural baggage behind it. I also have my reasons for using it that I have thought long and hard about. I don’t need people to necessarily agree with me; I just want them to not act as though I’m utterly ignorant of the issues. And, again, “The intolerance and inability to respect that those who share your values might not share your opinions on this particular subject”. This is a particular subject with which I disagree with people whom I otherwise agree with on social justice topics in general, to include racism and cultural appropriation.

So the author isn’t talking about SJ warriors going after people who are being very blatantly and insultingly racist, using deliberate slurs to harm. She’s talking about SJ warriors who are so very, very convinced that their perspective is the most right that they won’t allow any other possibility into the field, even from people who have considered their opinions just as much or even more than the Sj warriors have.

Online bullying – a new and ugly sport for liberal commenters (by Ariel Meadow Stallings)

I’m the Seattle-based publisher of a network of lifestyle websites read by roughly one million people each month. Almost all of our readers are women, most of them are educated and many of them are quite politically liberal. Because of this large, diverse and progressive readership, we deal with community issues that perhaps wouldn’t be such a problem on smaller sites. And lately, I’ve started to notice a disturbing trend.

Over the past couple of years, I’ve watched the rise of a new form of online performance art, where liberal internet commenters make public sport of flagging potentially problematic language as insensitive, and gleefully calling out authors as needing to “check their privilege” (admit their privileged position within society and its associated benefits).

As a publisher serving readers who identify as both progressive and marginalised (in many different, varying ways), this issue is hugely important to me – I’m protective of the quality of debate on my sites. As a progressive myself, it’s also complex and challenging because while I very much share the political values of the folks who engage in this kind of thing, I’m not on board with the tactics – which essentially amount to liberal bullying, and are way worse than anything I see from the conservatives who swing by my publications. The sad truth is that when it comes to the motivations behind this kind of commenting, it’s basically the same as the GOD HATES FAGS guys – even though the values are the polar opposite.

….

….

I love learning new things about how cultures are defining themselves. I love that people take the time to try to improve my publications by sharing the latest language that communities are using. I love that readers feel safe enough to voice their concerns. I love this shared concern for sensitivity around language. I love the social justice motivations, and the encouragement that we all be self-aware of how the language we use has powerful, sometime unexpected impacts on the people around us.

BUT. But. Seriously, I’m just not down with:

• The derailing of conversations to debate semantics.

• The need to process it all publicly (“Look at me look at me look at meeee! I am the very MOST aware of my privilege and am therefore the very BEST progressive on the entire internet!”).

• The righteousness.

• The intolerance and inability to respect that those who share your values might not share your opinions on this particular subject.

This is where this kind of conversation begins to feel more like liberal bullying, where the only correct response is agreeing and acquiescing. Any other response is seen as ignorant at best, hateful at worst.

Read the rest of the article here.

[Lupa’s note - These are just a few quotes from what is a really good article on the type of overreactive, self-righteous, hardline black and white social justice warrior activity that’s become so prominent on Tumblr and elsewhere. Chances are the people it’s criticizing will just keep justifying themselves anyway, but reblog this anyway for the sake of those who feel like they’re the only ones who hate this sort of bullying.]

[TW: rape] Crossposted from my FB - a comment I left

The main difference between female and male rape victims—and the gendering of rape culture—is that from an early age women in the US (and elsewhere) are subjected to daily, systematic, ingrained oppression that treats us as though we belo
ng to whomever decides to possess us, whether through catcalling or other verbal depersonalization and objectification, or through the violence of rape. We are told day after day not to get raped, and that if we are raped we must have done something wrong. There are still women around the world who are blamed, and even beaten and murdered, after having been raped, because somehow it brings shame on their families or means they must be promiscuous. 

While there are exceptions, as a general rule men do not experience this. That is the difference. Most men never understand this systematic element of rape culture, and most of those who do only did after they themselves were raped. For women, rape is a very real thing whether we have been through it or not because it is forced upon us as a concept for most of our lives. For men, rape is usually something they can ignore unless they are of the minority who has experienced or perpetuated it.

So that is why some people get frustrated when “WHAT ABOUT THE MEN??!!” gets brought up in every single discussion on rape, because then the prevailing culture surrounding rape that women uniquely experience on that systemic level gets ignored. While it is very important to talk about rape culture as it affects rape victims of all sexes and genders, this needs to not dilute or derail discussion about the more subtle and pervasive elements of rape culture that are specific to women as potential, as well as actual, victims.